The Christchurch Star. THURSDAY, JANUARY 2, 1930. A NEW YEAR RESOLUTION.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 18958, 2 January 1930, Page 8

The Christchurch Star. THURSDAY, JANUARY 2, 1930. A NEW YEAR RESOLUTION.

i & T>LESSED BE GOD,” as Samuel Pepys has written at -■-* the beginning of his immortal diary, the end of each year and the beginning of another provide an occasion for making all things “ even and clear in the world,” and for renewing good resolutions that, in some degree, provide a sheet anchor in the storms and stresses of life. As is well known, the great Diarist frequently bound himself a little too severely in some things, but at least he was punctual in paying the forfeits by which he penalised himself for broken vows, and despite his foibles and weaknesses, his credit in the world and in his office grew day by day largely, as is now realised, on the strength of the self-discipline to which he subjected himself. And there is one priceless leaf to be taken from his diary on the threshold of any new year—that leaf in which he declares himself “ in a good way and design and resolution of sticking to his business.” For if there is one good resolution that offers the sure reward of happiness and prosperity in the coming year, it is the resolution to work. The birth of a new year, as Charles Lamb has written, is of an interest too wide to be pretermitted (or, as we say nowadays, disregarded) by king or cobbler. From it, all date their time, and count upon what is left, and whether we manifest an exhilaration at the birth of the coming year, or are “ sanguine only in the prospects of other (former) years,” the conviction grows with each anniversary that personal and national prosperity and happiness are promoted only by the will to work. And the philosophy of “ sticking to business,” as Pepys puts it, never had more to offer than it has to-day.

RECKLESS DRIVING. MOTORING ACCIDENTS have increased at such an alarming rate in recent years that it is necessary to pause, at times, to consider the causes that lie behind them. Of course, the great increase in the number of vehicles using the roads, and the uniformly higher power with which they are equipped, in addition to the lure of better roads, must increase the danger of motoring, but recklessness is the main cause of accidents, and if it can be checked the statistics will show an immediate decline. And recklessness is caused by a “ love of swank.” It very often arises from a desire on the part of the motorist to show the other fellow that he can go faster than the man he is passing. It is a form of boasting which the sane driver disregards, for rashness on the road has nothing to recommend it and frequently leads to the loss of life. It requires few brains to take risks, and the brainless are indeed the ones who try to impress by “ cutting a dash.” But even the most thoughtless is not entitled to endanger anybody but himself. Just as the men who really have achieved something in any particular direction are the very men who talk least about it, so the best drivers are the ones who know enough to be careful. The man who indulges this form of boasting on the road does not reign long. He is soon involved in some crash. His vaunted reputation as a driver never stands the test of an emergency. His “ showing off ” in the end “ shows him up.” The sting of his action lies not in the fact that he brings harm to himself, but in that some innocent person is hurt.

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. CONTROVERSY will never end regarding the desirability of retaining capital punishment, because statistics on the subject are so difficult to collate. A cablegram to-day says that the partial suppression of the death penalty in France has had a disastrous result on murder statistics, as hard labour even on Devil’s Island seems mild and light compared with beheading. But an entirely new turn will be given to the controversy if solitary confinement for life should become part of the penal code, for notwithstanding the brutality of capital punishment, those who are at present opposed to it may well shudder at* the horrible alternative, which recalls the tortures of the Middle Ages. The solitary cell was tried first in America, and spread to British communities. Hobart, which preserves many relics of the convict days, still has the ruins of a penal settlement at Port Arthur, where one walks through the cells of the “ model prison ” in which solitary confinement was practised in grim reality, and passes on to the ruins of a huge criminal asylum, which had to be erected to receive the patients who were the immediate product of the solitary system. Certainly, Britain will never return to solitary confinement, and wall probably prefer to retain the death penalty for its deterrent value. In that connection, the experience of France is illuminating, because hitherto the opponents of capital punishment have maintained that it does not have a restraining influence on potential murderers. Their difficulty, of course, is to prove their case, and proof becomes more difficult with every improvement in the gaol systems of civilised countries. If the way of the transgressor ceases to be hard, the deterrent effect of punishment vanishes. The only question is how far individual wrongdoers must be made to suffer for the protection of the community at large.